Rosaria Butterfield’s books are essentially
agitation propaganda to advance the cultural Marxist agenda of
destroying Christianity and Western Civilization. Secret Thoughts and
Openness Unhindered were written to prejudice Millennials, Generation
X and future generations against Christianity and the Bible which calls
homosexuality an abomination and does not allow for the “gay Christian”
meme. These young ideologues have been educated in the atheistic philosophy
of cultural Marxism in schools and colleges
across the United States and other developed countries. They have learned
that Marxism is an improvement over Western Civilization but they have never
been taught the horrors of Communism, which is the destination to which
cultural Marxism is conveying them. Yuri Bezmenov predicted the unhappy
ending for the radical left Social Justice Warriors:

“The psychological shock, when
they will see in future what the beautiful society of equality and social
justice means in practice, obviously they will revolt. They will be very
unhappy, frustrated people. And the Marxist Leninist regime does not
tolerate this people. Obviously they will join the ranks of dissenters,
dissidents. Unlike in present United States, there will be no place for
dissent in Marxist Leninist America… In future this people will be simply
squashed like cockroaches.” (KGB
defector Yuri Bezmenov’s Warning to America)

The vocabulary of cultural
Marxism which Rosaria employs is familiar and acceptable to the historically
uninformed Millennials and Gen X, unlike previous generations which were
taught the totalitarian nature of Communism. To further the Marxist
programming of her young readers, Rosaria uses intellectual sounding words
and phrases like “ontology,” “teleology,” “social construct,”
“homosociality,” “homophobia,” ‘human flourishing,” “social justice,”
“egalitarian,” “greater social good,” “neologism,” “poststructural,”
“epistemology,” and “self-representation”
which are straight out of the philosophical, psychological and socialist
theorielgbr of Freud and the cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt Institute, such
as Herbert Marcuse, Antonio Gramsci and Theodor Adorno.

To poison the well and preempt
any credibility Christians may have to prevent the ruin of the younger
generation, Rosaria reiterates cultural Marxism’s dishonest portrayal of
Christianity:

“Homosociality
is an abiding and deep comfort afforded in keeping company with your own
gender, and finding within your own gender your most important and cherished
friendships. This is not a sin. Neither is this ‘gay’” But once that comfort
level shifts to sexually desiring a person with whom you are not biblically
married, you are in sin. ...homosexual lust
is a sin, but so is heterosexual lust and homophobia….

“Homophobia—the
fear and hatred of people who identify as
LGBT, and
the wholesale writing off of their souls.”
(Openness Unhindered, Kindle 607-608)

Rosaria’s equation of homosexual and
heterosexual lust with homophobia, defined as “hatred,” and “the wholesale
writing off of the souls” of LGBT people, is patently false. In the first
place, “homophobia” is not a sin but a God-given aversion to a sin that he
calls an “abomination.” Furthermore, Christians do not “hate” homosexuals
per se nor do we “write off” any soul.

As a cultural Marxist, Rosaria must demonize
Biblical morality to legitimize her “new conversation” which is “sexual
liberation” from the boundaries God has set for mankind. Rosaria’s statement borders on
Herbert Marcuse’s revolutionary call for sexual liberation from the
repression of “libidinous drives” by the “homophobia” of the
“monogamic and patriarchal family,’ whose
institutions will disintegrate by “changing the value and scope of
libidinous relations”:

“According to Marcuse,homo-phobia is a form of
capitalistic social control – ‘surplus repression’ – in which
libidinous drives are controlled through the elevation of the ‘monogamic and
patriarchal family’…the problematization of sex
is premised on the Marcusian hypothesis that ‘a resurgence of pregenital*
polymorphous sexuality…would lead to what Marcuse would identify as ‘a
change in the value and scope of libidinous relations’, that is, ‘the
disintegration of the institutions in which private interpersonal relations
have been organized, particularly the monogamic and patriarchial family’.”

*pregenital = prepuberty

The writings of Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979) were particularly influential in
the 1960s counter-culture sexual revolution and rise of the New Left. It was
said that “Marcuse quite ostensibly sponsored the student upheavals.”

“Fromm and Marcuse
introduce an element which is central to Political Correctness, and that’s
the sexual element. And particularly Marcuse, who in his own writings calls
for a society of ‘polymorphous perversity,’ that is his definition of the
future of the world that they want to create. Marcuse in particular by the
1930s is writing some very extreme stuff on the need for sexual liberation,
but this runs through the whole [Frankfurt] Institute. So do most of the
themes we see in Political Correctness, again in the early 30s. In Fromm’s
view, masculinity and femininity were not reflections of ‘essential’ sexual
differences, as the Romantics had thought. They were derived instead from
differences in life functions, which were in part socially determined.’ Sex
is a construct; sexual differences are a construct…

“One of Marcuse’s books
was the key book. It virtually became the bible of the [Students for a
Democratic Society] and the student rebels of the 60s. That book was Eros
and Civilization. Marcuse argues that under a capitalistic order (he
downplays the Marxism very strongly here, it is subtitled, A
Philosophical Inquiry into Freud, but the framework is Marxist),
repression is the essence of that order and that gives us the person Freud
describes – the person with all the hang-ups, the neuroses, because his
sexual instincts are repressed. We can envision a future, if we can only
destroy this existing oppressive order, in which we liberate eros, we
liberate libido, in which we have a world of ‘polymorphous perversity,’ in
which you can ‘do you own thing.’ And by the way, in that world there will
no longer be work, only play. What a wonderful message for the radicals of
the mid-60s! They’re students, they’re baby-boomers, and they’ve grown up
never having to worry about anything except eventually having to get a job.
And here is a guy writing in a way they can easily follow. He doesn’t
require them to read a lot of heavy Marxism and tells them everything they
want to hear which is essentially, ‘Do your own thing,’ ‘If it feels good do
it,’ and ‘You never have to go to work.’ By the way, Marcuse is also the man
who creates the phrase, ‘Make love, not war.’ Coming back to the situation
people face on campus, Marcuse defines ‘liberating tolerance’ as intolerance
for anything coming from the Right and tolerance for anything coming from
the Left. Marcuse joined the Frankfurt School, in 1932 (if I remember
right). So, all of this goes back to the 1930s.”

GAY CHRISTIANS?

Rosaria Butterfield disingenuously denies the success of all ex-gay
ministries and debunks Reparative Therapy as dangerous and hurtful to gay
people. But she does have another solution to the problem. Instead of
expecting homosexuals to repent of their sin, why
can’t Christians play mind games with the evangelical language, like
cultural Marxists do, of course to redeem it.

“Words, though, are unstable
creatures. We need revised dictionaries each year because new words enter
into the culture, and because words do change over time. In the 1990s, many
people in the gay community (myself included) ditched the term gay or
lesbian for the term queer. Why? In the sixteenth century, queer was an
adjective and meant perverse, strange, bad, worthless, and counterfeit. By
the eighteenth century, queer became dominantly used as a verb, and it meant
to interfere with or spoil (‘queer a pitch’), to swindle or to cheat. By the
late nineteenth century, queer was a pejorative term used again as a noun to
refer to a new kind of person, a homosexual. In an effort to take back the
word, queer activists embraced it in order to remake it on our own terms. We
believed that signs (words) and signifiers (meanings) could be reshaped by
sheer force of use, that they were inherently unstable and only found
meaning in our usage of them. We believed in the social construction of
gender and sexuality through language. We wanted to claim this term on our
turf, because once it became our term, it lost its pejorative power.

“So, if radical queer
activists can play with language to redeem it, why can’t evangelical
Christians? If language has an inherent fluidity, why not use this on our
own terms? Because as Christians, we need to practice what we want to
model: a call to use words honestly. A call to use words honestly, in ways
that correspond to God’s truth. And, while words do have a semantic range of
meaning, we are never to use this fact to deny that God’s standard for
obedience is the bulls-eye.” (Openness Unhindered, (Kindle 2019-2022)

Rosaria calls
Christians to “use words honestly”
and to never deny God’s standard for obedience, but then she proceeds to
inject clearly unbiblical terminology into the Christian vocabulary and
comes up with a new category of Christians – “gay Christians” who
profess to “love Jesus but are also,in
attraction or action,
persistently experiencing homosexual desires.”

“In the phrase ‘gay
Christian,’ gay is a descriptive or limiting adjective, and its job is ‘to
indicate the quality of a noun or pronoun.’ It indicates what kind of
Christian you are. When a limiting adjective is used to define a people
group, it is a mark of identity. When you modify the noun Christian with the
adjective gay, you pair terms with incompatible anthropologies, and
recommend a false philosophy of the soul. Adjectival modifiers create new
nouns. The case in point here is the category of ‘gay Christian,’
someone who both loves Jesus but is also, in attraction or action,
persistently experiencing homosexual desires. The question is this: do we
really want to say that gay Christians
are a different type of Christian? ...

“When I question someone’s use of the term ‘gay
Christian,’ I am not saying that I do not
want to hear about my sister and brother’s
deep feelings and longings. I am not minimizing these feelings and
identities and senses of self. I am not discounting the heavy hand of loss
that these feelings seem to portend, or the deep sensitivities and character
building that marginalization ushers forth. I am saying that I want to be
your friend. And, I’m saying that if you
stand in the risen Christ alone, your
self-representation is Christian.”
(Openness Unhindered,
(Kindle 2030-2040)

In other words,
Christians must assume that “gay Christians” are brothers and sisters in
Christ if they profess to be “in Christ” (‘represent themselves as standing
in the risen Christ alone.’) Rosaria accuses Evangelical Christians of
“easy believism,” but does she not see the superficiality of making a
profession of faith? How many deceived souls will stand at the
Judgment and hear the words, “Depart from Me, I never knew you.”

“Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter
into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is
in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not
prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy
name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never
knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”
Matt. 7:21-23

Rosaria’s understanding of the Gospel for gay people is not
necessarily the new birth and a changed life, but “representing oneself as
standing in the risen Christ alone” and “beckoned to grow in
sanctification.”

“‘New creature’ is a
term that beckons God’s people to grow in Christ-likeness, to grow in
sanctification, but we do harm to the call of Christ when we presume that
opposite-sex desires should replace same-sex desires as the exclusive proof
of real sanctification.” Openness Unhindered: Kindle 2058-2060)

John Calvin
mistranslated and rejected the Greek wording of 2 Cor.5:17 in his
commentary, which Calvinists believe teaches true Christianity.

“Therefore
if any man is in Christ. As there is
something wanting in this expression, it must be supplied in this way —
‘If any one is desirous to hold some
place in Christ, that is, in the kingdom of Christ, or in the Church1let him be anew creature.”

1.
‘Et estre tenu pour membre de ceste saincte compagnie;’ — ‘And to be
regarded as a member of that holy society.’”

How many Calvinists,
as a result of reading this commentary, believe they are “in Christ” by
virtue of joining a church, or making a covenant with a “covenant community”
which they are told is the “Kingdom of God”?

Of course, John
Calvin left no personal testimony of having been “born again,” but only of
his
conversion to the Reformation
which is consistent with his false interpretation of 2 Cor. 5:17. Those who
have never experienced “new birth in Christ” do not comprehend the radical
spiritual and moral change of becoming a new creation, as described
by 19th century Presbyterian theologian,
Albert Barnes in his
Notes on the New Testament,
which refutes John Calvin’s false interpretation:

“He is a new creature.
Marg., ‘Let him be.’ This is one of the instances in which the margin has
given a less correct translation than is in the text. The idea evidently is,
not that he ought to be a new creature, but that he is in fact; not
that he ought to live as becomes a new creature—which is true
enough—but that he will in fact live in that way, and manifest the
characteristics of the new creation. The phrase ‘a new creature’ (kainh
ktisiV) occurs
also in Gal. 6:15. The word rendered ‘creature’ (ktisiV) means, properly, in the New Testament, creation…

“Here it means a new creation
in a moral sense; and the phrase ‘new creature’ is equivalent to the
expression in Eph 4:24: ‘The new man, which after God is created in
righteousness and true holiness.’ It means, evidently, that there is a
change produced in the renewed heart of man that is equivalent to the act of
creation, and that bears a strong resemblance to it—a change, so to speak,
as if the man was made over again, and had become new. The mode or manner in
which it is done is not described; nor should the words be pressed, to the
quick, as if the process were the same in both cases—for the words are here
evidently figurative. But the phrase implies evidently the following things:

(1.) That there is an exertion
of Divine power in the conversion of the sinner as really as in the act of
creating the world out of nothing, and that this is as indispensable in the
one case as in the other…

“Old things are passed away. The old views in
regard to the Messiah, and in regard to men in general, 2 Cor 5:16. But Paul
also gives this a general form of expression, and says that old things in
general have passed away—referring to everything. It was true of all who
were converted that old things had passed away…
Their former prejudices, opinions, habits, attachments pass away. Their
supreme love of self passes away. Their love of sin passes away. Their love
of the world passes away. Their supreme attachment to their earthly friends
rather than God passes away. Their love of sin—their sensuality, pride,
vanity, levity, ambition—passes away. There is a deep and radical change on
all these subjects—a change which commences at the new birth; which
is carried on by progressive sanctification; and which is consummated
at death and in heaven.

“Behold, all things are become new. That is, all things in
view of the mind. The purposes of life, the feelings of the heart, the
principles of action, all become new. The understanding is consecrated to
new objects, the body is employed in new service, the heart forms new
attachments. Nothing can be more strikingly descriptive of the facts in
conversion than this; nothing more entirely accords with the feelings of the
new-born soul. All is new. There are new views of God and of Jesus Christ;
new views of this world and of the world to come; new views of truth and of
duty; and everything is seen in a new aspect and with new feelings. Nothing
is more common in young converts than such feelings, and nothing is more
common than for them to say that all things are new. The Bible seems to be a
new book; and though they may have often read it before, yet there is a
beauty about it which they never saw before, and which they wonder they have
not before perceived. The whole face of nature seems to them to be changed,
and they seem to be in a new world. The hills, and vales, and streams; the
sun, the stars, the groves, the forests, seem to be new. A new beauty is
spread over them all; and they now see them to be the work of God, and his
glory is spread over them all, and they can now say, ‘My Father made
them all.’

”The heavens and the earth are filled with new wonders, and all things seem
now to speak forth the praise of God. Even the very countenances of friends
seem to be new; and there are new feelings towards all men; a new kind of
love to kindred and friends; a love before unfelt for enemies; and a new
love for all mankind.”

Having never turned
her back on Sodom, Rosaria rejects the language of Scripture, which
identifies “gay Christians” as the “unrighteous” who “shall not inherit the
kingdom of God.”

“Know ye not
that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived:
neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor
abusers of themselves with mankind.” 1 Corinthians 6:9

UNEQUALLY YOKED

“Be ye not
unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath
righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with
darkness?” 2 Cor. 6:15

Christian readers
would likely give Rosaria a pass because her conversion seemed genuine and
her relationship with God seems very spiritual. And her book, Openness
Unhindered is subtitled Further Thoughts of an Unlikely Convert on
Sexual Identity and Union With Christ. Who does not aspire to “union
with Christ” which sounds ever so holy. For the most part, however, her
book is not about union with Christ but about how far the Church should
depart from the Word of God on the issue of homosexuality. All of her
religious talk is lipservice to advance her Marxist agenda which is to
manipulate Christians to affirm and admit to their churches those who “love
Jesus, but also, in attraction or action,
persistently experience homosexual desires.” In other word, gay persons can
continue their homosexual activities and still love Jesus.

Those who don’t
suspect an agenda – to bring homosexuals into the church membership – are
being deceived that all who call themselves “gay Christians” are brothers
and sisters in Christ who “are desperately trying to be heard.” But there
are many who call themselves “gay Christians” who are sexually active and
have no intention of changing their lifestyle, but have infiltrated
Christian churches to change their interpretation of Scripture. For example,
the leadership of the
Southern Baptist Convention has been meeting with LGBTQ organizations
which are demanding that homosexuality be omitted from the Bible’s “sin
list.” Here are a few “sin lists” the LGBTQ wants removed:

“Mortify
therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness,
inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is
idolatry: For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of
disobedience.” Col 3:5-6

“For this
cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change
the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the
men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward
another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in
themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” Rom. 1:26-27

The dialectical
process is in play, but few Christians would recognize it as a ploy to
compromise God’s Word by adopting the new term “gay Christian” and the
LGBTQ’s “queering” of Scripture. (See
Part 9: “Queer Theory”)
Rosaria Butterfield’s mixed message is Stage 1 of the dialectical process
leading Christian churches to compromise the Word of God and, ultimately, to
embrace same-sex marriage.

Do you see the progression to a predetermined outcome in this dialectical
scheme? In Stage 1, “gay but celibate Christians” are received and affirmed
in the churches. In Stage 2, it will be found that gay celibacy does not
lead to “human flourishing” (more “newspeak”)
as claimed by Pastor Fred Harrell of the San Francisco City Church,
a plant of Tim Keller’s New York City Church. In the San Fran City Church,
the condition of celibacy was waived and gay men and lesbians are now
welcomed as “gay Christian” members.

“Pastor Fred Harrell of City Church, San Francisco,
just announced his elders have embraced sodomy and will grant sodomites
access to membership in the church and full communion at the Lord's Table.

“Our pastoral practice of demanding life-long
‘celibacy,’ by which we meant that for the rest of your life you would not
engage your sexual orientation in any way, was causing obvious harm and has
not led to human flourishing...

“As we consider the life of Christ, his example
of love, his call to embrace the outsider and cast down, and his patience
with those earnestly seeking him, what is a Christ-like response?

“...the doors of this church are as wide as the
arms of the Savior it proclaims.

“We will no longer discriminate based on sexual
orientation and demand lifelong celibacy as a precondition for joining. For
all members, regardless of sexual orientation, we will continue to expect
chastity in singleness until marriage...”

Another example of the “gay celibate Christian”
modus operandi is former Wheaton College chaplain, Julie Rodgers, who worked
with Exodus International and claimed being a “celibate gay Christian.”
Eventually Julie admitted that all along she was in favor of same-sex
marriage and she is now
engaged to be married to another lesbian.

The fact that so many articles
by Reformed leaders slamming Christians as homophobic are published in the
Washington Post reveals their true liberal position on homosexual issues.
Russell Moore and Albert Mohler occasionally pay WaPo a visit to broadcast
their criticisms of the Christian Church.

To hear their
complaints, one would think that “gay celibate Christians” are the only
people in the church with a cross to bear, who have to deny themselves, lose
their lives and suffer for Christ, although theirs is a false Christ. One
homosexual change agent who seems to have no clue about the Christian life
criticized the apostle Paul for being too spiritual:

“Tyler Huckabee, a former
editor of Relevant magazine, and Julie Rodgers, until very recently
a counselor at the Wheaton College chaplain’s office, both publicly endorsed
same-sex relationships…

“A 30-year-old graduate of
Moody Bible Institute, Huckabee chided the apostle Paul for his low view of
sex: ‘This is a rather dim view of sex, which isn’t all that surprising,
considering Paul. He seemed hugely unbothered by anything that wasn’t
strictly spiritual.’

“Perhaps this is my
overweening traditionalism speaking, but my ears always perk when I see a
millennial who writes about Marvel
comics publicly
tweak an apostle whose ministry for Christ led to his beheading.” (Owen
Strachen)

LGBTQ Millennials are
demanding that the churches accommodate their lifestyle so they don’t feel
unhappy or unwanted or different from others or guilty about their sin.
Julie Rodgers is one of these complainers about how hard it is for Gays in
the church:

“I’ve become increasingly troubled by the
unintended consequences of messages that insist all LGBT people commit to
lifelong celibacy. No matter how graciously it’s framed, that message tends
to contribute to feelings of shame and alienation for gay Christians. It
leaves folks feeling like love and acceptance are contingent upon them
not-gay-marrying and not-falling-in-gay-love. When that’s the case—when
communion is contingent upon gays holding very narrow beliefs and making extraordinary sacrifices
to live up to a standard that demands everything from an individual with
little help from the community—it’s hard to believe our bodies might be an
occasion for joy. It’s hard to believe we’re actually wanted in
our churches. It’s hard to believe the God who loves us actually likes us.,

“I don’t think this happens because anyone hates
gay people. Most of the Christians I know love gay people­. They simply
underestimate the burden of feeling
marginalized, scrutinized, unwanted and
relationally toxic because one of the best things about us—the way we give
our love away—is seen as sinful. It’s easy for straight Christians to
underestimate how exhausting it is to simply
exist in communities that feel uncomfortable with gays:
we’re constantly wondering if we should tell the truth when asked that
question, or sleep on the floor when there’s room in the bed, or cut that
hug short, or voice that question, or publish that post, or write that
tweet, or curb that mannerism, or run from that friendship, or shut down
those feelings or leave the church altogether. Those fears subside around
friends who simply delight in who we are as whole human beings made in the
image of God.”

Tragically, the Millennial generation appears to
never have heard Jesus’ teachings on suffering. The apostles understood the
reason for suffering; they embraced fiery trials, and rejoiced that they were
counted worthy to suffer for Christ.

“Are
they ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool) I am more; in labours more
abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft.Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one.
Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered
shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep; In journeyings often,
in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen,
in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the
wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; In
weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in
fastings often, in cold and nakedness. Beside those things that are without,
that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the churches.Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I
burn not? If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which concern
mine infirmities.”

To further agitate
gays who feel “marginalized” by the Church, Rosaria pulls out the moral
“race card” accusing Christians of “ghettoizing” “gay Christians” as
inferior Christians—which begs the question of whether “gay Christians” even
belong to the Body of Christ:

“The question is this: do we really want to say that gay
Christians are a different type of Christian? Doesn’t that create the kind
of ghettoizing subgroup mentality that works against and not for real unity
in Christ’s Body?...

“Many people who identify as “gay Christian” are
desperately trying to be heard. And the church needs to listen up, because
the failure to listen degrades faithful brothers and sisters. The
conservative Christian church bears some responsibility for driving brothers
and sisters in Christ into this “gay Christian” ghetto with our blindness to
the way that we have insensitively tried to fix or fix up all of the singles
in our church.” (Openness Unhindered, Kindle 2040-2042).

Many ministers and church members who are
intimidated by this bullying will end up affirming “gay Christians” and many
will even modify their preaching to appease the LGBTQ demands.
However, as this dialectic runs its course, Christian pastors everywhere
will not be allowed to preach against homosexuality or counsel homosexuals
to repent, for
“reparative therapy” is fast becoming illegal throughout the U.S.
In our rapidly declining culture, it is perfectly legal and right for school
administrations and teachers to counsel children to change their biological
gender, but it is illegal and harmful to counsel an LGBT person so they can
make the transition to heterosexuality, which is God’s design for mankind.

When the Supreme
Court legalized same-sex marriage in 2015, Rosaria Butterfield and
Christopher Yuan issued a joint statement which is posted at
The Gospel Coalition.

“The Supreme Court of the
United States of America has made gay marriage legal in all 50 states, and
much of our country celebrates. The world with its rainbow flags waving
proudly and plentifully was our world. We locked arms with our LGBT loved
ones and friends and believed they were truly and honestly our family of
choice.

“This is the world that we,
Christopher and Rosaria, helped build—a world pursuing dignity and equality.
The people you see celebrating the recent SCOTUS decision to redefine
marriage (and with marriage, personhood) would have been us, not very long
ago.”

Predictably, Rosaria
and Yuan did not miss another opportunity to criticize the Church:

“Defining marriage as being
between a husband and a wife appears unfair to the LGBT community, in part
because a life of singleness is seen to be crushingly lonely. Have we in the
church inadvertently played into that lie with our idolatry of marriage
while being pejorative and silent toward singleness? If singleness is
unfair, then it’s no wonder marriage has become a right. Just as the LGBT community
appealed to the rest of the world for dignity and respect, it’s time for the church to
fight for the dignity and respect of single women and single men.

“Some are now comparing the
Supreme Court’s decision on gay marriage with the 1973 Roe v. Wade
decision on abortion. Indeed, there is an important lesson for us to learn
from the pro-life movement. Today, there are more pro-life young adults than
others from previous generations who champion pro-life. When pro-life
people, made up of more than just evangelical Christians, began fighting
less and caring more for unborn babies and for women with unplanned
pregnancies just as they were,
a shift in focus brought about an important change. So the question now
stands: will we begin caring for the LGBT community just as they are?”

A
discerning blogger took issue with their demands that the Church “fight for
the dignity and respect of [LGBT] single men and single women” and “begin
caring for the LGBT community just as they
are.”

“Yuan and Butterfield’s particular application of these ideas is
rhetorically worrying, and it leans overly much on a blurring of
distinctions between heterosexual and homosexual single people…

“I must take issue with this paragraph towards
the end of the statement:

“When pro-life people, made up of more than
just evangelical Christians, began fighting less and caring more for unborn
babies and for women with unplanned pregnancies just as they were,
a shift in focus brought about an important change. So the question now
stands: will we begin caring for the LGBT community just as they are?

“Right away, the phrase ‘just as they are’
raises a whole host of questions, all of which are conveniently evaded as
the authors’ word count runs out. Even under the assumption that they would
draw the line at affirming sin, or welcoming unrepentant homosexuals as
official church members, a phrase like this is meaningless without specific
examples and clear definition of terms. Define ‘care for.’ Define ‘LGBT
community.’ Define ‘as they are.’ Do the authors mean to imply that
Christians are duty-bound to invited unsaved gay and lesbian couples into
their homes, even if they have young families? Do they mean to imply that a
man who believes himself ‘transgender’ should be allowed to use the bathroom
of his choice at the local church? Do they mean to imply that anyone who
expresses concerns about shared living situations involving even celibate
gays and lesbians is a bigot? And so on and so forth.

“Furthermore, I have no idea what they think
they mean when they refer to pro-life activists’ ‘fighting less’ Perhaps
they need to do a bit more catch-up reading on the history of the pro-life
movement. The truth is that the fight for legislative restrictions on
abortion has run in absolute parallel with the rise of outreach
ministries to pregnant women. These things are not mutually exclusive and
never have been. Yes, on-the-ground tactics have been somewhat refined and
updated as data comes in about their efficacy (e.g., marching with graphic
pictures outside abortion clinics), but this is hardly the same thing as
‘fighting less.’ ‘Important change’ may be brought about in a variety of
ways, including political activism. The recent expose of Planned
Parenthood’s trafficking practices, which has been met with serious talk of
defunding Planned Parenthood altogether, is a particularly stark example…

“I was focusing on
their paragraph about ‘loving our LGBT neighbors as they are.’ In point of
fact, I have yet to see either of them offer specific answers to most of the
particular questions I was asking. And what Rosaria has offered as far as
‘hospitality’ is concerned actually makes me more, not less worried. She
treats it almost like a joke in her autobiography when she talks about
inviting her ‘transgender’ friend to church and drawing embarrassed looks. I
don’t know what her opinion is on bathroom usage and the like, but let’s
just say she wasn’t appearing to take the concerns of ordinary church folk
about their kids and their privacy in such a situation nearly seriously
enough.

“She has also spoken
and written at length about how Christians are not being properly
Christianly unless they behave with maximal friendliness and hospitality to
even unrepentant homosexual couples. For example, she talks about a lesbian
couple who lives in her family’s own neighborhood, and with whose kids she
lets her children hang out freely. Her entire mode of interaction with this
couple and their kids sounds altogether too free and easy, and whether she
acknowledges it or not, that kind of unhindered communication does have an
anesthetizing effect for the kids involved. There are scenarios involving
heterosexual sin where this is a concern as well. For example, suppose your
neighbor is shacking up with his girlfriend. Do you have him and the
girlfriend over for lunch and tell your 5-year-old, ‘Oh, this is Mike and
Sarah! They live in the house down the street, only to be stuck for an
answer when 5-year-old Joey asks, ‘Are they married?’ I say no. All the more
reason not to take that approach with a couple who practices perverted sex.

“So actually, I’ve
looked into their other work and already have concerns even with what little
I’ve seen that begins to address my questions. I guess I disagree that all
relatively orthodox writers and speakers should be ‘congratulated’ merely
for being orthodox on a hot topic. If there really are issues that are not
getting addressed, or not being addressed in a satisfying way, we should
point that out.”

“SAFE SPACES”

The latest performance in the “gay Christian”
theater of the absurd is chanting their “woe is me” dirge because neither
the Church nor the LGBTQ culture loves them. It’s not their fault they are
gay, so it’s the responsibility of the Church to be a refuge for unrepentant
homosexuals who claim to be celibate (but this could change if they are not
“flourishing” like heterosexuals do). Take, for example, Greg Coles’ Single, Gay, Christian: A Personal Journey of Faith and Sexual Identity
which is Coles’ “story” of “belonging nowhere”
because the church does not understand his homosexuality and the LGBTQ
community doesn’t understand his celibacy.

“‘I’m gay.’ I’ll tell you how I cried and prayed
and begged God to make me straight, or else to make me believe that the
Bible left room for monogamous same-sex relationships. I’ll tell you how God
kept refusing to do either one, how he kept pointing me back to the cross of
Christ. How I followed my Savior in costly obedience and became a mythical
creature, a thing that wasn’t supposed to exist: a single gay Christian.

“I’ll show you the world through my eyes: The
books on Christian masculinity that never seemed to be about me. The
churches that treated my singleness like an acne problem that could be
cleared up with a few weeks’ treatment. The sincere Christians who called it
‘love’ when they talked about people like me with revulsion in their voices.

“I’ll tell you what it’s like to belong nowhere.
To know that much of my Christian family will forever consider me unnatural,
dangerous, because of something that feels as involuntary as my eye color.
And to know that much of the LGBTQ community that shares my experience as a
sexual minority will disagree with the way I’ve chosen to interpret the call
of Jesus, believing I’ve bought into a tragic, archaic ritual of
self-hatred.” (Prelude)

“About:
The Center for Faith, Sexuality & Gender is a collaboration of Christian
pastors, leaders and theologians who aspire to be the Church's most trusted
source of theologically sound teaching and practical guidance on questions
related to sexuality and gender.”

“Leadership:
Our collaboration is a growing team of Christian leaders, pastors, scholars,
and LGBT+ persons to serve as advisors, writers, speakers, researchers, and
board members.”

The Center for Faith, Sexuality and Gender is all about creating “safe
spaces” for the LGBT+.

“The Commons is an online platform where pastors and leaders can share ideas
to
create safe space for LGBT+ people,
their families, and to engage the unique challenges that arise in
conversations related to sexuality and gender.”

“At The Commons you’ll find:

“All the Pastoral and Academic Papers written by Dr. Preston Sprinkle and
other pastors and scholars in the field. New papers will be forwarded to
members of The Commons as they are written or updated.

“Videos, podcasts, e-books, and other resources put out by The Center to
help leaders stay ahead of this fast-moving culture shift.

“Discussion forums where pastors and leaders are asking questions and
sharing ideas about how churches can
maintain theological faithfulness while extending radical compassion and
gospel-centered care for LGBT+ people.
These
forums are open only to members of The Commons, assuring confidentiality.”

Of course, all of the Center for Faith’s
resources and activities are “confidential” in order to conceal their real
agenda which is to convert Christian churches into “safe spaces.” The
Center for Faith may as well own their affinity with the Human Rights
Campaign whose work is toward the same end.

Same goal as Leftist religious groups like the United Church of Christ’s
“New Sacred” Blog:

“The need for safe spaces should not be limited to universities. If any
place is going to offer psychological protection, shouldn’t it be the
church?

“How can the church create a safe space?

“By prioritizing people over theology or politics. We can keep each other
safe only by setting aside any worldview disagreements and prioritizing
healing and love.

“By becoming educated about all manner of oppression. We should know how our
communities are being impacted by various forms of oppression.

“By listening rather than speaking. We should be asking trauma survivors
what they need to feel safe and to heal.”

The only difference between the Human Rights
Campaign, PFLAG, the UCC’s New Sacred and Together for the Gospel, Gregory
Cole and Center for Faith, Sexuality & Gender is that the latter claims to
espouse “celibacy” and the “faithful Biblical view.” However, as we have
seen, the “celibacy” requirements are waived as soon as LGBTs get their foot
in the door and don’t feel like they are “flourishing.” And a recent Center
for Faith video is actually a
promo for
sexually active
homosexuals, lesbians and transgenders who
are seeking to become members of Christian churches.

Gregory Coles’ major field was Rhetoric and
he is a doctoral candidate in English.

“His academic research on rhetorics of
marginality (how language works in society for disadvantaged groups) has
appeared or is forthcoming in College English and Rhetorica.”

“Rhetoric refers to the study and uses of
written, spoken and visual language. It investigates how language is used
to organize and maintain social groups, construct meanings and identities, coordinate behavior,
mediate power, produce change, and create knowledge.
Rhetoricians often assume that language is constitutive (we shape and
are shaped by language), dialogic (it exists in the shared territory between
self and other), closely connected to thought (mental activity as ‘inner
speech’) and integrated with social, cultural and economic practices.
Rhetorical study and written literacy are understood to be essential to
civic, professional and academic life.” (What
is Rhetoric?)

As documented in the next section, Rosaria’s
English major equipped her and her radical queer activist community to
“queer” the social construction of gender and sexuality through language
to effect cultural change. Would this also be Gregory Coles’ job description
at the Center for Faith, Sexuality and Gender?

Coles’ language in an article on the
Center for Faith, Sexuality and Gender blog
reflects the immature, entitled, not to mention irreverent, attitude
he is encouraging in the younger generation for whom he writes. Through his
“rhetoric of marginality” he is basically deconstructing their Western
values and encouraging them to be nonconformist, irresponsible and
perverted, and he calls this “loving Jesus.”

“Being so in love with a two-thousand-year-old
Jewish guy that I choose not to pursue any of the present-day guys I might
fall in love with.”

“Worshipping the same God as people who think my
very existence is an affront to heaven. Standing halfway between the LGBTQ
community and the evangelical church community, not quite fitting into
either one, catching occasional rotten tomatoes from both sides of the
aisle.

“Gay Christian celibacy is weird.

“In some ways, I’m deeply saddened by this state
of affairs. I lament that the church has historically created so little room
for sexual minorities. I hate that kids who grow up gay and Christian are so
often told they must choose between loving Jesus and ‘being gay,’ as if
their mere sexual orientation were enough to send God running in the
opposite direction. I mourn the many people like me who don’t feel safe
being open and honest about their sexuality within their communities...

“One of my
concerns with 21st-century evangelical Christianity in the West is that
we’ve lost the art of weirdness. We chase after
political power, create monocultural social bubbles, climb socioeconomic
ladders, and fit quite comfortably into Western society. We’re so busy
living lives that make perfect rational sense, becoming known for our
campaigns and policies rather than our mind-boggling love and devotion.
We’ve fallen out of practice at following Jesus in startling ways.

“And in that sense, I love being a celibate gay
Christian. I love having people stare at me like I’ve sprouted athird eyeball
when I explain what Jesus means to me, the things I’ve given up for him, and
the joy I’ve received in exchange. I love telling people how I’ve
experienced the faithfulness of God to look out for my wellbeing in the
moments I stop putting myself first. I want to be remarkable, not because of
my sexuality, but because of the all-consuming way in which I love Jesus...

“Our lives were meant to be written in code,
indecipherable to onlookers except through the cipher of Jesus.
If you claim to follow Jesus, gay or straight, and your life story makes
perfect sense without the cipher of Jesus, you might need to reconsider who
you’re actually following.”

On the cover of Coles’ book,Single, Gay, Christian, is the occult
symbol (code/cipher) of the All Seeing Eye of the counterfeit Jesus the book
is peddling:

Stephen Black of
Restored Hope Network wrote an article
expressing his astonishment that D.A. Carson, president of The Gospel Coalition,
endorsed Gregory Coles’ book. Black then penned an adaptation of the apostle
Paul’s rebuke of the Corinthian church for tolerating incest in their
assembly. In his missive, Stephen Black substituted the oxymoron “gay
Christians” for the “incestuous Christian” whose “alternative lifestyle” was
permitted in the Corinthian church which was proud of being “tolerant.”

“I was reminded of what St. Paul wrote in his
epistle to the Corinthian church in1
Corinthians 5. I highly recommend reading
this chapter before reading the rest of this article. So with this in mind,
and with all this merging of homosexuality – ‘gay’ and Christianity, I will
do a little merging myself, as I believe St. Paul would say something like
the following:

“It is actually reported everywhere that there is
sexual immorality among you, a kind of immorality that is condemned even
among the people in the world with common sense: that some are having
intimate relationships with members of their own sex. Some of you are
emotionally enmeshed with members of your same-sex and you are embracing
unnatural desires for one another.You are proud
and arrogant to put homosexuality before Christlikeness and call yourselves,
‘gay Christian.’ How utterly offensive this is to God and to the truly
repentant sexual sinners. You should have mourned in shame so that the
people who have done this disgraceful thing would be removed from your
fellowship! Instead, you are welcoming this perversity into the Church?

‘For I, though absent from you in my physical
body, but present in spirit, have already passed judgment on those who have
committed these perverse acts as if I were present. I am also passing
judgment on those who are promoting this detestable and unnatural behavior.In
the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I am with you in
spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to hand over these people
who continue in their sin to Satan for their destruction, so that their
spirits may be saved on the judgment day of the Lord Jesus.

‘Your boasting over the supposed spirituality of
your church is not good, indeed, it is vulgar and inappropriate in allowing
such uncleanness. How disgusting to spiritualize homosexuality and put it
before our Savior’s title of Christ. This ‘gay Christian’ word merger is
blasphemous. Do you not know that just a little leaven, leavens the whole
batch of dough, just as a little sin, when tolerated, corrupts a person or
an entire church? Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new batch,
just as you are, yet you are still unleavened. For Christ, our Passover Lamb
has been sacrificed. Therefore, let us celebrate the feast, not with old
leaven, nor with the leaven of uncleanness, vice, unnatural behaviors,
malice, and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity,
holiness, consecration and untainted truth. This is not even debatable! Get
this evil of homosexuality, idolatrous relating and ‘gay Christianity’ out
of your midst!

‘I wrote you in my previous letter not to
associate with sexually immoral people—not meaning the immoral people of
this world, or the greedy ones and swindlers, or idolaters, for then you
would have to get out of the world altogether! The body of Jesus Christ must
give the compassionate message of the uncompromising good news to those
living in immorality. But I have clearly written to you. I have told you not
to associate with any so-called Christian brother if he persists in sexually
immoral or is greedy, or is an idolater like putting the word merger of ‘gay
Christian,’ or an idolater devoted to anything that takes the place of God,
or a reviler, or those practicing drunkenness or a swindler—you must not so
much as eat with such a person who claims Christ as Savior and Lord and
continues in sin.

‘‘Do you not
understand? I am clearly telling you not to have any fellowship at all with
those who are sexually immoral or idolatrous! Let me make this clear, this
includes people bringing in sexual uncleanness in the way of ‘gay
Christianity!’ For what business is it of mine to judge outsiders, the
non-believers? Do you not judge those who are within the church, to protect
the church from defilement, as the situation demands of those who are under
the authority of the Holy Spirit? God alone sits in judgment on those who
are outside of the faith. Remove the wicked one from among you, expel him
from your church. Have you become so arrogant under this so-called ‘gay
pride banner’ that you are acclimated to evil to embrace pride as a good
attribute being blinded by the six colors of this banner which actually
represent the number of man and the judgment to come? Have you really become
so deceived and lack passion and love for your Savior that you defile His
very title as your Savior and Master? It is reported that you are allowing
these LGBTQ so-called Christians to defile Christ the Messiah by attaching
the lust of Sodom to Christ by embracing the description ‘gay Christian!’

“What is wrong with you
people? Have you completely lost all sensitivity to the Living God and
Jesus Christ your King? Do you have the Holy Spirit of God? How utterly
debaucherous and evil to have the Name of the Holy Son of God defiled by
those who have uncontrollable desires and lust for members of their own
sex! This is against nature, and makes a mockery of God! However, I also
heard it reported that you have about 70% of your men now looking at
pornography every week? Is this true? The majority of the men in your midst
are now fornicators? Truly the presence of the Holy Spirit is being removed
from you if you do not repent quickly! It is utterly disgusting to think you
would allow for this continuation of all this sexual uncleanness, along with
‘gay Christianity,’ to debase Our King from Heaven with such unspeakable
perverse sins! Truly judgment is at the door of your church if you do not
repent quickly!”

The Corinthians were faithful to obey Paul’s
command to remove the incestuous Christian, which brought about his
repentance, restoration and salvation. Unfortunately, removing the “gay
Christians” from the churches and requiring repentance is not an option for
cultural Marxists, whose agenda is transforming Christian churches into
“safe spaces” for sexual perversion. But God is not fooled by man’s labels.
Those “safe space” apostate churches will not be safe in the final Judgment,
nor will “gay Christians.”